MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1934871951 · doi:10.1111/anae.13193

Normalising lean body weight

2015· letter· en· W1934871951 on OpenAlexaff
John H. P. Friesen

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2015
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLean body massMedicineBody weightBody mass indexWeight lossWeight managementScalar (mathematics)ObesityMathematicsInternal medicineGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In their recent guidelines for the peri-operative management of obese patients, the authors recommend lean body weight as one of the weight scalars that are useful when estimating drug doses 1. By definition, a weight scalar must not only be proportional to the desired doses, but also be equal to total body weight for non-obese patients. Lean body weight is less than total body weight for all patients, including those of normal weight, because it is total body weight minus the fat mass. To avoid underdosing, lean body weight must be scaled upwards before it can be used as a weight scalar 2, 3. This can be accomplished by normalising lean body weight to ideal body weight using a factor of about 125% for men and 150% for women 4. The resulting weight scalar is proportional to lean body weight for patients of all weights and heights, and is easily calculated or estimated given total body weight and body mass index. The authors of the guidelines 1 also recommend calculating and recording useful quantities including body mass index and weight scalars in order to aid in the management of obese patients. A mobile app for smart phones and tablets that does just that can be downloaded free (as BigSleep) for iOS (Apple Inc., Cupertino, CA, USA) and Android (Google, Mountain View, CA, USA) devices, and is also available as a web application 5. It performs the calculations and then remembers the values throughout the procedure.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207